Hugh Bailey: It helps to have connected friends

Published 5:53 pm, Friday, October 11, 2013

The state Supreme Court might save Paul Vallas a lot of money. It's become increasingly clear it won't be able to save his job.

The court is deciding whether the Bridgeport superintendent is qualified for his position, and will take a few months to think it over.

By the time the ruling comes down, it may not mean much. Judging by the words of likely incoming school board members, there will probably be a majority that wants him out anyway.

You can argue whether that's a good idea. It might be worth waiting to see what the court rules, since if he's deemed unqualified the board likely wouldn't need to pay him a year's salary, as it would have to if he's fired. But there's not much ambiguity in the words of people who are set to form a majority on the board.

A recent op-ed by the three Democratic nominees for school board said, "There are some problems, however, that are a direct result of an unqualified leader using a `rubber stamp' Board of Education to do what's politically expedient, not what's in the best interests of our children."

Language like that suggests they don't plan to keep said "unqualified leader" around long. Unless two Republicans can somehow beat out Working Families candidates, there will be a majority on the board opposed to his policies.

In the meantime, the superintendent continues the daily work of running the school system, including the recently started negotiation of a new contract with the teachers union.

This is a big deal. "I am working very closely with Vallas," Mayor Bill Finch said earlier this year. "He's never seen a contract as bad as this."

Board of Education Chairman Kenneth Moales agreed. "We need a collective bargaining agreement that for the first time ever is more children-focused, not simply to serve out the needs of adults."

Vallas, though, sounded a different note, saying among his priorities is to give teachers raises, which is hard to square with a mayor who said, "We need major concessions in that contract."

If you put any stock in his words, this is Vallas' main reason for still being here. He has told more than one out-of-town journalist that he expects to depart after the contract is settled.

So, since he will either leave on his own or possibly be let go by a new school board, the Supreme Court's decision may not matter. Given that, it might be worth hoping the court rules in Vallas' favor if only to see the contortions that justices would have to put themselves through to justify calling what he did at UConn a "school leadership program," as proscribed by law.

Lacking an education degree, Vallas needed a waiver and to complete a program at a state university to qualify as a superintendent. The course he took consisted of writing a few papers and making two phone calls.

The justices, though, seemed amenable during oral arguments to the idea that this was no problem. Chief Justice Chase Rogers pointed out that the state Legislature, when it passed a 2012 law with Vallas in mind, left the specifics of the program undefined. "Doesn't that suggest they wanted discretion by the board?" she asked.

If the court rules in his favor and says his course was sufficient, it will beg the question of what, exactly, would have been insufficient. One phone call? Three days' worth of work instead of a week's, as he described it in testimony? If the Supreme Court rules in his favor it will be saying that the words "school leadership program" have no meaning.

It will be saying that as long as you have well-placed friends willing to waive requirements, laws mean what you want them to mean.